Synthetic RNA and RNA Therapeutics
Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is ubiquitous in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, where it encodes genetic information in the form of messenger RNA, binds and transports amino acids in the form of transfer RNA, assembles amino acids into proteins in the form of ribosomal RNA, and performs numerous other functions including gene expression regulation in the forms of microRNA and long non-coding RNA. RNA can be produced synthetically by methods including direct chemical synthesis and in vitro transcription, and can be administered to patients for therapeutic use.
Cell Reprogramming and Cell-Based Therapies
Cells can be reprogrammed by exposing them to specific extracellular cues and/or by ectopic expression of specific proteins, microRNAs, etc. While several reprogramming methods have been previously described, most that rely on ectopic expression require the introduction of exogenous DNA, which can carry mutation risks. DNA-free reprogramming methods based on direct delivery of reprogramming proteins have been reported. However, these methods are too inefficient and unreliable for commercial use. In addition, RNA-based reprogramming methods have been described (See, e.g., Angel. MIT Thesis. 2008. 1-56; Angel et al. PLoS ONE. 2010. 5, 107; Warren et al. Cell Stem Cell. 2010. 7, 618-630; Angel. MIT Thesis. 2011. 1-89; and Lee et al. Cell. 2012. 151, 547-558; the contents of all of which are hereby incorporated by reference). However, existing RNA-based reprogramming methods are slow, unreliable, and inefficient when performed on adult cells, require many transfections (resulting in significant expense and opportunity for error), can reprogram only a limited number of cell types, can reprogram cells to only a limited number of cell types, require the use of immunosuppressants, and require the use of multiple human-derived components, including blood-derived HSA and human fibroblast feeders. The many drawbacks of previously disclosed RNA-based reprogramming methods make them undesirable for both research and therapeutic use.
Gene Editing
Several naturally occurring proteins contain DNA-binding domains that can recognize specific DNA sequences, for example, zinc fingers (ZFs) and transcription activator-like effectors (TALEs). Fusion proteins containing one or more of these DNA-binding domains and the cleavage domain of FokI endonuclease can be used to create a double-strand break in a desired region of DNA in a cell (See, e.g., US Patent Appl. Pub. No. US 2012/0064620, US Patent Appl. Pub. No. US 2011/0239315, U.S. Pat. No. 8,470,973, US Patent Appl. Pub. No. US 2013/0217119, U.S. Pat. No. 8,420,782, US Patent Appl. Pub. No. US 2011/0301073, US Patent Appl. Pub. No. US 2011/0145940, U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,450,471, 8,440,431, 8,440,432, and US Patent Appl. Pub. No. 2013/0122581, the contents of all of which are hereby incorporated by reference). However, current methods for gene editing cells are inefficient and carry a risk of uncontrolled mutagenesis, making them undesirable for both research and therapeutic use. Methods for DNA-free gene editing of somatic cells have not been previously explored, nor have methods for simultaneous or sequential gene editing and reprogramming of somatic cells. In addition, methods for directly gene editing cells in patients (i.e., in vivo) have not been previously explored, and the development of such methods has been limited by a lack of acceptable targets, inefficient delivery, inefficient expression of the gene-editing protein/proteins, inefficient gene editing by the expressed gene-editing protein/proteins, due in part to poor binding of DNA-binding domains, excessive off-target effects, due in part to non-directed dimerization of the FokI cleavage domain and poor specificity of DNA-binding domains, and other factors. Finally, the use of gene editing in anti-bacterial, anti-viral, and anti-cancer treatments has not been previously explored.
Accordingly, there remains a need for improved compositions and methods for the expression of proteins in cells.